Harrod v. Irvine

OPINION

STUMBO, Judge.'

David R. Harrod appeals from a summary judgment of the Franklin Circuit Court wherein the court determined that the issues raised in his intervening complaint were previously resolved in a sepa*248rate 1999 Franklin Circuit Court action. Harrod argues that the circuit court erred in applying res judicata to the present action, that the subject matter and parties of the two actions are not the same, and that the court improperly relied upon a surveyor’s affidavit. Cross-appellant, Bruce Irvine, also contends that the circuit court misapplied the rule of res judicata. For the…